Fam­ily squab­ble

Re­port 4 Skoda Ko­diaq £29,960 OTR/£33,895 as tested


Reg­u­lar read­ers might re­mem­ber I pre­vi­ously ran a Nis­san X-Trail, a di­rect com­peti­tor to the Ko­diaq. In our re­cent £30k fam­ily SUV test (is­sue 298), the Ko­diaq came out on top. But I wanted to get them to­gether and see how they ft­ted to my needs, as I re­mem­ber the X-Trail be­ing a very good pack­age.

And, af­ter spend­ing some time with the (E)X-Trail, I don’t dis­agree with our re­sults, but I do feel it’s closer in the real world. Dy­nam­i­cally and fnan­cially, the Ko­diaq beats the X-Trail hands down. It’s bet­ter value, feels much more like a car, has a lot less body roll. While the X-Trail wal­lows, the Ko­diaq will get the kids to school, fast.

But, for me, the in­te­rior pack­ag­ing is cru­cial, and the X-Trail is bet­ter – the two far rear seats sit lower and fur­ther back, so there is more over­all space for heads and legs. The boot open­ing is higher, mak­ing it easy for kids to clam­ber through and for adults to load the boot. A lot of this is to do with the shapes of the cars, with the Ko­diaq opt­ing for a more sporty rear while the X-Trail is higher and more boxy. But what you gain in height and leg room you lose in bootspace when all seven seats are up. The ad­van­tage there goes to the Skoda.

So, is there a win­ner? While the Ko­diaq is the bet­ter car, the X-Trail, for my cur­rent needs (three young kids), is the more prac­ti­cal for ev­ery­day use. Come the time when the kid seats are gone, I’d be pluck­ing the Ko­diaq and its greater sporti­ness and bet­ter looks. But if Nis­san and Skoda are pay­ing at­ten­tion, what these two re­ally need is the abil­ity to get three car seats across the mid­dle row. Is any­one lis­ten­ing?

Big dif­fer­ence in roofline pro­file makes the X-Trail eas­ier to use

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.